Posted on 12/23/2020 10:26:09 AM PST by SeekAndFind
You just have to read the lawsuit
There are a lot of bizarre things in it.
Not sure if he was going through a divorce at the time..dont know his timeline.
He has said he was going through a difficult time because of his family’s view on his religion.
His posts and tweets remind me of something I Have seen in my own extended family to some extent..but since I dont want to get sued I will just leave it at that.
Oh I see what you are saying..yeah, it could be that
Lawfare.
Here is the lawsuit. It make for amusing reading, if nothing else:
https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/documents/404/51923/Lin-Wood-complaint.pdf
Wood has addressed some of these charges, but since most of what he said was recorded in voicemails, he has said: (1) the remarks were taken out of context, (2) they were made when he was having a difficult time, and under stress, and (3) they have nothing to do with the dispute between him and the associates.
He has gone past that and attacked the associates personally since the filing, and that may be why the gag order. I don't think the associates have commented publicly, other than the suit itself, but I could be wrong.
The cherry on top for me is that Raffensperger’s brother works for the CCP in China, according to a thread here on FR on Tuesday.
The law is a joke and to follow a court order in this climate is the way to lose all freedoms. I’m beyond accepted the rule of judges. A free people must be free to speak above all.
It’s a verified lawsuit, which means the allegations are made under penalty of perjury. That is a very, very powerful opening salvo. In an unverified complaint, you can allege whatever you want. Your court pleadings are protected by litigation privilege, so you are not exposed to a defamation lawsuit. And generally, it is ridiculously difficult for a prevailing defendant to get a judgment for “malicious prosecution.”
But when you file a verified complaint, everything is different. You are telling the defendant “we mean business, and we dare you to dispute our factual allegations.”
I don’t practice law in GA, but if I were to give an estimate, I would say fewer than 10% of lawsuits are verified.
Reading the complaint, Wood comes across as a con man who stole money from his own law partners.
I suspect this will not end well for him. Between this lawsuit, and the various unmeritorious stuff he filed elsewhere, I suspect he will be disbarred.
Let’s wait and see.
Wow..that prediction is pretty harsh.
Do you abhor all laws? How about the Constitution, which is the Supreme Law of the Land?
Or do you just abhor laws that don’t suit people you like?
A Delaware court has already issued an Order to Show Cause against him, to determine whether he is qualified to practice law there, given his various garbage filings.
Two items of note:
1- He is not licensed to practice law in DE, but he filed for “pro hac vice” admission, which means he asked to be allowed to do just one case.
2- The judge issued a “suo sponte” order, which means it was by the court’s own motion. It was not in response to any motion filed by any party.
The man has violated so many ethical rules, it is only a matter of time the State Bar discipline process catches up to him. And a presidential pardon will do him more harm than good. A pardon does not eliminate State Bars’ regulatory power, but it strips him of his 5th Amendment protection, so he may be compelled to testify, which means he may have to either commit perjury or incriminate himself.
This will not end well for him.
I think he was just trying to bully them out of their share of a big settlement. Lots of lawyers talk big and make loud-mouth threats. Maybe for a guy like Wood, this would have just been business as usual.
He has a habit of going personally against those who don't do what he wants - the GA gov and SOS were corrupt. John Roberts was corrupt. Now this judge is corrupt.
He is coming across more like Avenatti - if he was Trump's enemy, he'd be on CNN, the View and every other leftie freak show, being hailed as "presidential material."
But from here, it's looking like a big crash and burn.
Maybe he'll surprise me, but I wouldn't bank on it.
Reading the lawsuit, in February of this year his behavior sounded so erratic that he may have been close to some kind of complete mental breakdown. He’s lucky he didn’t go over the edge and end up institutionalized. That very thing happened to a man in my mother’s neighborhood a few years ago. He was going through a divorce, was under stress with his business and had become obsessively religious. After the police and the medics came to his house several times over a period of months, they finally took him away. As far as I know, he never returned to his house. It was finally sold by the ex-wife who had already moved to another state when they separated.
Since your role here is that of a blasphemous, deep state defender, sounds to me like Wood probably just hit paydirt.
Yup. Let’s wait and see.
BTW, the comparison to Avenatti is exactly on point.
The rule is so fraught with exceptions and First Amendment considerations that it is rarely invoked and frequently voided when it is. Lin Wood is right to complain.
Yup.
I predict he will be hit with State Bar disciplinary proceedings, and I predict he will raise “temporary mental illness” as a defense.
Let’s wait and see.
BTW, generally speaking, it is an unfortunate truth that we treat mental illness with derision, even contempt. As a young law school grad, I saw a colleague go into stress-induced nervous breakdown. Another colleague made a point I will never forget: “If the illness is in any body organ, we will give the patient our compassion. But if the illness is in the brain - which is just another organ - we give the patient derision and contempt.”
Anyway ... moving from the general topic of mental illness to Mr. Wood, I suspect this will be an issue in his State Bar discipline proceedings.
Let’s wait and see.
Nobody should obey a gag order issued by a black-robed tyrant.
Why do you advocate the may not respond to articles about him in Mother Jones, Atlanta Journal Constitution or New York Times?
Not really. Gag orders are routinely issued in explosive or scandalous business litigation cases where one lawyer insists on jumping in front of cameras and microphones every chance he gets.
A close cousin of the gag order is the protective order, which is also routinely issued where private facts, sensitive facts, or trade secrets are involved.
Lawyers must litigate in courts, and any attempt to put on a show or leak facts or disparage opposing parties or counsel is unethical.
Perhaps the man in your mother’s neighborhood was bipolar...and decided not to take his meds.
Or he could have just had a mental breakdown all on his own.
I still kind of get a laugh over being accused of trying to kill one of my relatives because when I ordered his groceries there was a multipack of different flavor of drinks that had grapefruit flavor in it. I had no idea that a medication he was on couldn’t be taken with grapefuit. I think at the time I didnt even have a clue that grapefruit was an issue with some meds.
But he was absolutely convinced I was trying to kill him for his money..even though he had none.
And there was no convincing him otherwise until he came down off his paranoid rocket
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.